I personally do not see the difference between holding the phone to your ear and speaking to someone on bluetooth! If either distracts you to the point of causing an accident then you should not have a licence at all! I can appreciate there are stats that prove otherwise but i still think it's a load of bollocks!

So I use my phone on a holder and use it as a SatNav using the Waze application. While driving the app actually asks you if you're stuck in traffic etc and you click yes or it times out, you're not forced to do it, however I do use this. So what I've read so far, this is now breaking the law? The phone isn't in my hand, I just touch the screen.

If I say had a car with a full touch screen system like a lot of cars these days, would that be breaking the law? I test drove a Tesla a while back, and you can't do anything on that car without using the massive touchscreen. Everything from heating to the SatNav is on there.

You're allowed to touch screens. The device has to be held in your hand for a CU80.

This must be a grey area as although I agree with you, the industry I work in means I talk to people with motoring convictions daily & I know many that have received a CU80/Breach of control for being caught typing on a sat nav whilst stuck to the windscreen.

I have an iPad mini mounted in my e90 which I use for Spotify, so I use it like I would a car stereo - I assume I'm liable to prosecution if I get caught using it!

Not sure how they could get away with getting convictions for people doing that due to the following. Then again, a law unto themselves.

Quote:

The definition of a CU80 driving offence is contained within Section 41D of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and said to be “the driving of a motor vehicle while using a hand-held mobile telephone or other hand-held interactive communication device.”

For these purposes;

Hand-held device – is something that “is or must be held at some point during the course of making or receiving a call or performing any other interactive communication function”.

Using a Device – “similar” to a mobile phone, where it performs an ‘interactive communication’ function by transmitting and receiving data.

No different to changing radio station, track, volume on a radio. All less dangerous than eating, drinking and smoking whilst driving which are all legal.

They must have been from Driving without due care and attention surely. It's impossible for a CU80 to apply going by definitions.

I think they would get you for driving with undue care & attention if you was involved in an incident whilst either;
Eating
Drinking
Shaving
Putting on make up/doing your hair
Using a handheld device
Speaking on hands free
Using your sat nav
Adjusting your radio
Fiddling with I-drive
Just about anything....probably not sneezing though

2) Get in touch with a road traffic lawyer specialist and get him/her to take a look at the case.

I'm not saying you've been done incorrectly by the letter of the law. And i don't know where the burden of proof lies. But i've been stopped many many times as the police have suspected something and i do the "yes sir, no sir, 3 bags full sir" approach and to date i've been "let off". But i have had them lie to me. Telling me i was speeding when i have HUD on the X5 and was following a guy on a racer down a single track road. They said they followed me speeding down that road. However i saw them start following me at a later point. I didn't call them liars. I just explained i had noted that i was doing 27 miles per hour and following a cyclist for half a mile and was impressed at his speed. So they sometimes lie to get to admit to stuff. They would never had had proof because they actually started following me on the next road i turned onto after passing the bike. I knew that. And they knew that i knew that after 20 mins of going round my car with a fine tooth comb.

They have to be a bit more careful these days what with the popularity of dash cams. 'Oh really constable? I'll have to check my rear facing dash cam. Are you 100% you were following me for so long?' See them squirm heh.

2) Get in touch with a road traffic lawyer specialist and get him/her to take a look at the case.

I'm not saying you've been done incorrectly by the letter of the law. And i don't know where the burden of proof lies. But i've been stopped many many times as the police have suspected something and i do the "yes sir, no sir, 3 bags full sir" approach and to date i've been "let off". But i have had them lie to me. Telling me i was speeding when i have HUD on the X5 and was following a guy on a racer down a single track road. They said they followed me speeding down that road. However i saw them start following me at a later point. I didn't call them liars. I just explained i had noted that i was doing 27 miles per hour and following a cyclist for half a mile and was impressed at his speed. So they sometimes lie to get to admit to stuff. They would never had had proof because they actually started following me on the next road i turned onto after passing the bike. I knew that. And they knew that i knew that after 20 mins of going round my car with a fine tooth comb.

Ok the Conditional Offer (Endorsable) has arrived and i have been offered 2 options

Option 1 £100 and 3 points on my licence

Option 2 take the matter to court.

Im now doing my insurance Renewal and just put it on to see what it does to my policy and it went up by £24 for the year. so say for example £24 for 5 years = £120 + £100 fine works out at £220 its going to cost me more than this in court and i could come off a lot worse so guess i am best to take the points. Im assuming the code will be as above CU80

They have to be a bit more careful these days what with the popularity of dash cams. 'Oh really constable? I'll have to check my rear facing dash cam. Are you 100% you were following me for so long?' See them squirm heh.

Careful with that though. If it is deemed as "admissable evidence", then they have the power to secure it from you.

So if the police accuse you of a crime you didn't commit, you have evidence you did not commit it, they can confiscate said evidence on the spot leaving you with nothing when it gets 'lost'. That can't be right surely?

Ok the Conditional Offer (Endorsable) has arrived and i have been offered 2 options

Option 1 £100 and 3 points on my licence

Option 2 take the matter to court.

Im now doing my insurance Renewal and just put it on to see what it does to my policy and it went up by £24 for the year. so say for example £24 for 5 years = £120 + £100 fine works out at £220 its going to cost me more than this in court and i could come off a lot worse so guess i am best to take the points. Im assuming the code will be as above CU80

As a matter of principle, i'd still go see a road traffic lawyer / specialist and get their advice.

My guess is that they are not going to be able to prove anything - i seem to remember that 2 police officers don't need evidence as such but if they witness something it is admissable in court. I don't think 1 is.

You could take photos of you using various devices from the position the bike was parked to where your car was and prove that there is no way they could have seen you using your phone. It could have been your wallet etc. Again all depends on what you've signed for to date, and what statements you've given etc.

I'm no lawyer but if I'm not mistaken, you've already incriminated yourself in your first post. The 'fact(?)' that you "picked up" the phone rather than "just touched it with your fingers", puts you on the wrong side of the thin blue line.